Vivek Kundra On US Government Inefficiency 306
parkland writes "Federal CIO Vivek Kundra described some dismaying government inefficiencies in a speech on Thursday at the University of Washington's Evans School of Public Affairs in Seattle. It takes 160 days to process benefits for veterans, he said, 'because the Veteran's Administration is processing paperwork by passing manila folders from one desk to another.' Another example bound to make you grind your teeth is why it takes the Patent and Trademark Office 3 years to process a patent. 'One reason,' says Kundra, 'is because the USPTO receives these applications online, prints them out, and then someone manually rekeys the information into an antiquated system.'"
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:2, Informative)
Is because there's no consequence for them doing a bad job, so they can take their own sweet time. You have to screw up pretty badly to get fired by the Federal government.
Sadly, the same is pretty true in corporate America. Heck, my father used to get excel files on floppy disks mailed to him every month in manilla envelope, because no one could configure their corporate e-mail system to allow larger file sizes and most managers didn't know how to attach files (this was in 2002).
Re:Inefficiencies. (Score:1, Informative)
I think it's not so much an aging workforce as an incompetent workforce. Given it's pretty much impossible to be fired for incompetency from the government, there's not really any incentive not to be.
Re:Healthcare (Score:3, Informative)
What's the use of all the private-insurer "efficiency" if they prefer to use it to screw you over for one more dollar?
And I say "efficiency" because health insurance companies in US already have one of the highest overhead costs in the world, so you can hardly called it efficient.
Re:Inefficiencies. (Score:2, Informative)
I work in academia, which is in many ways culturally similar to working in government. I wonder how many of these inefficiencies persist in order to placate an aged workforce that refuses to embrace technology and learn to do anything in a new way.
I see a lot of people around here just sort of "running out the clock" - I can't imagine we're unique.
--saint
Government is heavily Unionized. This explains a hell of a lot of the problem.
A staple hero of modern Unions is John Henry - the man that killed himself to beat the steam hammer. The rational of his heroism being that it was better for the men to keep their jobs doing back-breaking work rather than let the steam hammer do it better and let them move on to something that would kill them less.
Unions celebrate inefficiency that maintains "jobs". They'd rather have 10 men do the work that one man with technology could. Because it grows their ranks. You hear the celebrated tales of union workers throwing their wrenches into the machines brought in to replace them.
China has 4 times as many people, and they invest in technology to make each of their workers 3 times as productive as an American. The West's days are numbered.
Failed Logic (Score:4, Informative)
In a normal company, if you're inefficient, you make less money.
You could not be more wrong. In most large companies, what passes for efficiency is neither faster nor cheaper. Success is based mostly on being the loudest with the deepest pockets.
In small companies, it is merely the persuasive abilities of the customer facing people and the rare pragmatic customer.
Seriously, it it time for this doublethink to die.
The government never makes money
Yes, they do. Fees? Penalties? Taxes? It's time for the "Government is the root of all inefficiency" to die.
Inaccurate about the Patent Office (Score:5, Informative)
The Patent Office does not do that and hasn't for years, except of course for papers that are mailed or faxed in. The Patent Office's Electronic Filing System [uspto.gov] is an end-to-end electronic system for the most part.
Now, the EFS system does convert searchable PDFs to bitmap PDFs, which causes them to lose their searchability and greatly increases the file size, which is still incredibly backwards, but not quite as bad as printing things out and scanning them back in.
Re:Healthcare (Score:3, Informative)
Let's mark that one up there with the "It's snowing, so global warming can't exist". We don't have to guess how it would work out, anyway. The fact is that Medicare and Medicaid are some of the most efficiently-run medical insurance programs in the country, with a higher percent spent on actual care than any private insurance company. It's too bad that even if the bill passes we wouldn't be able to get a public option.
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:4, Informative)
You would think the entity in charge of keeping things running would want them done quickly and accurate.
Large organizations don't have collective will. They consist of huge numbers of people, each with their own agenda. And it doesn't help when the organization reports to elected officials who need to bring home the pork in order to stay in office.
Bad as the current federal bureaucracy is, it actually used to be much worse. Before civil service rules (the same ones that make it so hard to fire people), government jobs were filled by "patronage" meaning that the politicos used them to reward their supporters. Up until the 60s, the chairman of the party that held the White House was always the Postmaster General, the Post Office being the single biggest source of patronage in the U.S. government. The PO was finally so badly run that they reconstituted it as the semi-autonomous Postal Service.
Re:Healthcare (Score:5, Informative)
Medicare overhead - ~5.2%-8% (depending on whose numbers you use)
Private insurers' overhead - ~16%-35% (depending on whose numbers you use)
So keep your government hands off my Medicare...
Oh. Wait...
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:1, Informative)
I looked carefully at the original purpose of the Federal government and found these words: ... establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty..
No where is there a reference to "efficiency". In fact, I believe a certain amount of government inefficiency enhances liberty.
In any case our elected officials are ultimately responsible for any inefficiencies. That fact that most elected officials are elected for life indicates that people just don't care.
What most people care about is money. That is they constantly complain about outgoing taxes but are eager to gobble up Social Security and Medicare checks , Farmer subsidies etc.
Re:Failed Logic (Score:5, Informative)
The government never makes money
Yes, they do. Fees? Penalties? Taxes? It's time for the "Government is the root of all inefficiency" to die.
My power company [cwlp.com] is owned by the city government, and it turns a profit. It also has the lowest rates in the state, and the most dependable electricity. Its customer service is stellar. If the customer service or dependability drops, or if rates rise too much, it's guaranteed to cost the Mayor the next election.
It doesn't hurt that Mr. Burns [sj-r.com] runs CWLP. [sj-r.com]
Re:Nailed it. (Score:3, Informative)
Thanks for the backup. I also want to add that MANY of the government (or whatever bureaucratic) workforce have a good work ethic. They are just so mired in bureaucracy and poor process they can make very little headway.
Congress is partly to blame here. Want to buy ANYTHING for the Government? Well, you have to go through this Congressionally mandated checklist:
1) Is there a disadvantaged business that can supply it?
2) How about a small business?
3) Prove you're not stealing from the Government, please, and BTW, to prevent you stealing, you need 4 phases of review and 5 signatures for your purchase.
4) How about a woman-owned business?
5) Is there a mandatory vendor for which we've negotiated a price? Justify not using them. I don't care that the vendor you found costs 40% less.
6) Is this the same vendor you used last time? Justify why you're not using a different vendor, or switch vendors. The Government doesn't play favorites, you know!
7) Justify why you need this thing in the first place, in triplicate, and BTW, get these 4 people to review and sign off.
8) Prove this purchase isn't going to have a negative environmental impact. I don't care that you're buying computer software.
AND THIS ISN'T AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST.
Ever wondered how the $10,000 toilet seats came about? This is how. And a lot of it can be laid at Congress's door. If ANYTHING gets done at all, it's because of the industrious work of way, way more people than should be needed to do the job, because of Congress's rabid application of their power to create new rules for everything.
--PM
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:3, Informative)
There are consequences, some of them dire.
OK, first let's look at the F22 Raptor or the MiG-35. Arguably, the final word in modern aviation, these aircraft demonstrate a great deal of progress in aviation and all other relevant scientific application. A lot of technology, some of the technology is the very spear head of their relative fields.
Now, there are VAX/VMS systems still used in the military. I'm not talking about some old geek with one in his garage that he tinkers with, no, these archaic machines are still essential, still used, still certified, still needed. At some point in the development from paper to manufacturing, a old and busted VAX/VMS was called on for the development of the F22 Raptor. Likewise, for the Russians, something equivalent might have been used in the testing, verification and manufacturing of their MiG-35 no doubt.
Today, in the ship yards, the latest in maritime might is being constructed. Super carriers, massive beasts of the ocean capable of forward deployment anywhere in the world. These massive ships can push through the water fast enough to create a 35knot head wind for catapulting jet aircraft from a short distance, only about 60 feet above the water and make them airborne. 35knots is rather fast, and it's almost impossible to appreciate what a feat this is, even if you are physically standing on one of these ships in awe of it's size. I mean, the water displacement alone standing still is on an order of 90+ tons... it's unbelievable. Yet, right now, at the docks, someone is bringing a box of DDS-1 drives on board, real to real tape reals on board... even though no manufacturer makes that stuff anymore, but in spite of the billions of dollars to build that marvel, in spite of it being indicative of superior technology, some key technologies have yet to be changed (because they simply work).
One might ask, "shit, dds-1? jesus who uses dds-1? why can't the military use flash drives or something new?". Well, therein lies the problem, because why use the flash drives? Seriously, we aren't talking about your home box, that has no life or death responsibilities. We can't go to a Senator and say "this is the newest stuff, maybe a little buggy, but since it's new, let's have it replace old and established fire control systems on board submarines!". No one, is going to want to stand a chance of a misfire, whether it's an accidental launch or perhaps worse, a faulty launch when one is intended. At the same time, a department head will say "well, it costs x million dollars to have this new technology integrated... regression testing, certification... testing, verification... it takes years to do, by the time it's said and done, they'll surely have something new. We have to decide not to chase the Joneses and stick with what we already invested in."
It does make sense. Basically, the only way to introduce new technology into the military/government, is for it to be introduced as a new technology entry point, new implementation (which is costly as it requires testing against old systems, and certification). For example, want new fast CPUs installed on a jet fighter? Come up with some technology that the military buys from you, and the initial implementation have quad-zeon processors, but for the next twenty or thirty years that's what's going to be used... quad-zeon processors. Because the program office is going to certify the hardware, configuration and software to a 'T', and that combination and only that combination is going to be certified for that particular use in aviation. These guys don't play around, they can't afford to take chances, lives are at stake. In fact, some proprietary software sold to the government goes through bug fixes and revisions without actually incrementing version numbers, because for certain aspects of the program, if they do increment a version number then that requires re-certification, other aspects of the program might only require evaluation and approval from the program office (re: some regression te
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:5, Informative)
It's a perfect example of untrue but widely believed anti-union propaganda. This cop's union didn't help him [chicagobreakingnews.com], nor should it have. If your're caught stealing office supplies, your union won't help you. If you're reprimanded or fired for smoking in a no-smoking area, your union won't help you. If you're a "no call no show" your union won't help you. If you show up for work drunk your union won't help you. If your boss trumps up some bullshit charge because he just doesn't like you, then your union WILL help you.
This is an example of an untrue statement being widely believed simply because it's been parroted so many times. If you work for a paycheck, you're probably better off with a union.
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Am I the only one who... (Score:3, Informative)
can't wait for a government health care system run like that.
Like what? As others have pointed out above, with actual emprical data rather than ideological cant, single-payer/public/non-profit systems have lower overheads than the US private system. Even Medicare in the US has lower overheads than private American insurers.
Overhead is a primary measure of efficiency. Lower overhead means more efficient.
There are no actual facts supporting any claim of superiority for the US private health care system: people in countries with public systems live longer and spend less than Americans do.
This does not mean Obamacare is a good idea: it isn't, because too many ignorant ideologues have prevented Obama from setting up a genuine public system of the kind found the world over, from Canada to Sweden to Australia, where in all cases average outcomes are better, lives are longer, and costs are lower than in the American system.
Re:Healthcare (Score:3, Informative)
I think if the Veterans Affairs system or the USPTO system were implemented fresh today they would be very different.
The Veterans benefit system was already in the process of being upgraded long before Kundra showed up... http://veterans.senate.gov/hearings.cfm?action=release.display&release_id=2b3c1e81-a85c-4cdf-8af6-51ce711dad8f [senate.gov]
Lots of low tech intertia there. It's easy to use a new system with electronic documents with new accounts, but not so easy to deal with migrating the 2.7 million existing accounts, especially when a lot of physical paper is involved. It just won't happen overnight. Meanwhile you have to support both the old and new systems.
Too literal (Score:1, Informative)
Literally burning? What are you suggesting, that we take literal matches and literal firewood and...? Wait! Are you suggesting that our government is literally overrun by witches?
(Though it might explain "Newt" Gingrich...)
Re:Possibly another reason (Score:1, Informative)
What a total load of bovine excrement. I was a union member for a while. The shop steward had an unlicensed gun in his toolchest, at work. He kept his job, even post-arrest, solely because he was shop steward. So if you work for a paycheck, unions are good for illegal activities. In a reasonable world, there are very few situations in which unions actually provide value. Namely, for those occupations with workers who are physically transient from job to job. Some trucking situations, building, perhaps others. But the original motivation for unions was to provide a shield to protect employees from abusive employers. The only thing that MOST (not all by any means) unions are good at is to screw union members out of "dues" with absolutely no value add, and to cause small business owners to waste significant dollars and time defending themselves. Given that small businesses make up the majority of the economy of the US, unions simply reduce the GNP.
Re:Healthcare (Score:3, Informative)
Obviously you've never dealt with the VA. Imagine your experience with private health care and then imagine a similar system run by people who can't be fired.
Sadly, the VA is some of the better healthcare in the US. The people working there can be fired, especially if the press gets involved and politicians want to capitalize on the public interest. In the private sector, of course the employee can be fired, but more likely they will be given a bonus for exactly what they did to me. At the VA they probably don't care and just want to minimize their own work. In private insurance they are being paid to waste your time and make things hard on you, so you might just go away or die before costing them any more money.